As I said above, they are basically the same colors and they are both profiles of raptors with a very similar design. I mean, if you saw USM's design without knowing it belonged to them, you'd think that Iowa had updated their logo. That's what the trademark system is meant to prevent.

But the school colors aren't different and that's part of the issue. Did you know that "Tony the Tiger Orange" is a trademarked color? If try to trademark a tiger that looks very little like Tony, but use that color, you will get rejected. It's the same basic principle. Just because you can tell the difference between them doesn't mean there isn't a strong resemblence between them.

I could maybe, possibly, probably not though having a case if they were in the same market (I know its not relevant in a lawsuit) but the hawkeye is 2d and has little detail, whereas the southern miss is way more detailed and doesn't look like a kid used a elementary stencil and traced it.

I guess I can see how one could think that the left logo is just an updated version of the Hawkeye logo.

EDIT: Geez, the more I look at this the more the Iowa logo looks terrible. I mean, if you take the stencils and put them together, it looks like some guys junk got torn to shreds. Shredded junk is no way to run an institution of higher learning.

These kinds of cases/disputes may sound silly, but there are millions of dollars arguably at issue in them. All of these designs are trademarked and the trademarks are extremely valuable. Valuable trademarks are protected and strictly enforced. For example, Apple most definitely prosecutes companys that use the logo on knock-off computers. There really is no difference in the legalities/arguments in a case like that (an obvious one) and in the Iowa case. The difference is that some people do not think the Hawkeye trademark is as valuable as Iowa believes it to be.